Examine how EWIs are put to use within a bank's process for managing liquidity risk.
The idea
Within liquidity risk management, early warning indicators (EWIs) are the monitoring layer that connects day-to-day measurement to the contingency funding plan (CFP). Each indicator has graded thresholds, often green, amber and red. They are set tighter than the risk tolerance or limit so that management gets lead time. A breach is reported to the asset-liability committee and senior management. Management then diagnoses whether the cause is bank-specific or market-wide, steps up monitoring, and decides whether to activate CFP actions such as building the buffer, extending term funding or curbing asset growth. EWIs also inform stress scenario design and are reviewed and back-tested regularly. They complement rather than replace limits and stress tests. Limits cap current exposures, stress tests size losses, and EWIs detect the onset. The usual mistake is moving a threshold to clear an alert. The exam point is that EWIs trigger escalation before limits are breached.
A practice question
Why do many banks set graded thresholds, such as amber and red, for the same EWI?
- Because regulators require exactly two thresholds for every indicator that a bank monitorsWhy not: No regulation prescribes exactly two thresholds; graded levels are good practice.
- So that breaches occur often enough to keep the responsible staff alert and engaged at all timesWhy not: Frequent breaches cause alert fatigue; grading is meant to match response to severity.
- To allow graduated responses, from closer monitoring at amber to CFP activation at red - correct
- To separate asset-side indicators from liability-side indicatorsWhy not: Thresholds grade severity of one indicator; they do not classify indicators by balance sheet side.
Graded thresholds link severity to proportionate action: amber typically leads to heightened monitoring and notification, red to convening the CFP team and implementing actions.
A harder one
A bank's policy compares its liquidity buffer with 30-day stressed net outflows: green at or above 1.30, amber from 1.10 to below 1.30, red below 1.10. Amber requires more frequent monitoring and notice to the ALCO; red requires convening the CFP team. The buffer is USD 1,150 million and stressed net outflows are USD 950 million. What is the status and response?
- Green: the ratio is above 1.00, so the buffer covers the outflowsWhy not: Compares with 1.00 rather than the policy's 1.30 green threshold; a ratio of 1.21 is below green.
- Amber: ratio of about 1.21, so increase monitoring and notify the ALCO - correct
- Red: the ratio of about 0.83 is below 1.10, so convene the CFP teamWhy not: Inverts the ratio (outflows divided by buffer); the policy defines buffer divided by outflows.
- Red: 1.21 is below 1.30, so the CFP team must be convenedWhy not: Treats the top of the amber band as the red trigger; red applies only below 1.10.
Ratio = 1,150 / 950 = 1.21, which lies between 1.10 and 1.30, so the status is amber. The prescribed response is more monitoring and notifying the ALCO, not CFP activation.
The hardest tier
A retail deposit EWI measures the net decline in deposit balances over five business days as a percentage of the opening balance: amber above 1.5 percent, red above 3.0 percent. The opening balance is USD 8,000 million. Over the five days the bank paid out USD 260 million and received USD 70 million of new deposits. Total assets are USD 15,000 million. What is the status?
- Red: the gross outflow of USD 260 million is 3.25 percent of the opening balanceWhy not: Uses gross outflows, ignoring the USD 70 million of new deposits; the indicator is defined on the net decline.
- Amber: the net decline of USD 190 million is 2.4 percent of the opening balance - correct
- Green: the average daily net decline of 0.475 percent is below 1.5 percentWhy not: Compares a daily average with a five-day threshold; the cumulative net decline must be used.
- Green: the net decline of USD 190 million is 1.3 percent of total assetsWhy not: Uses total assets as the base; the indicator is defined relative to the opening deposit balance.
Net decline = 260 - 70 = USD 190 million; 190 / 8,000 = 2.375 percent, above amber (1.5) but below red (3.0). The gross outflow (3.25 percent), the daily average (0.475 percent) and total assets (1.27 percent) are all wrong measures.
In the app: 6 practice questions on this outcome, spaced review that brings it back before you forget it.
Start free →